Jyoti Basu would grumble, but never deviate from the protocol expected of him. As chief minister of West Bengal for well over two decades, Basu had to deal with several prime ministers belonging to different political parties and alliances — the Congress, the National Front, the United Front and the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance. Basu was a towering national leader and senior to all the prime ministers who ruled at the Centre while he ran the West Bengal government from Writers’ Buildings. Politically also, Basu belonged to the Left, while all the prime ministers he had to deal with belonged to the other end of the spectrum, and with many of them his relations were less than cordial.
Yet, protocol demanded that whenever the prime minister visited West Bengal or its capital city, Kolkata, the chief minister must call on the head of the central government. Basu or even his successor Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, never failed to honour that protocol even though they may not have enjoyed such formal meetings.
In sharp contrast, Mamata Banerjee, minister for railways in the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, has little regard for such protocol. She has let her personal preferences influence her conduct even as a minister. Thus, she would visit the ailing Jyoti Basu, but would not think twice before disregarding members of the West Bengal government who may have been present at Basu’s residence at that time.
She makes no secret of her dislike for the current chief minister of West Bengal. That is understandable since her politics is entirely dependent on generating hatred and antipathy towards the Left in West Bengal. This, however, does not explain why she should not honour protocol as a central minister. If the Indian Railways and the West Bengal government are involved in a railway project in the state, the chief minister of West Bengal and the Union railway minister should ideally be present at a function to mark its inauguration.
For Mamata Banerjee, however, the presence of Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee is not a requirement. So, she held the function without the chief minister. Is that a breach of protocol? Purists may debate this, but the railway minister cannot take her personal animosity with the Left to a level where the aggrieved chief minister of West Bengal can legitimately make this a Centre-state issue.
Interestingly, the same function, to which the West Bengal chief minister was not invited, had Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee as one of the guests on the dais. Did Mukherjee’s presence signify that Banerjee’s conduct had tacit endorsement from the Congress leadership at the Centre? Not really, for Mukherjee made amends later by making it known to everybody that he would be attending another function where he would be sharing the dais with the West Bengal chief minister. It is a different matter that this function did not take place, but Mukherjee was clearly trying to make a point.
More From This Section
Why only blame Mamata Banerjee or Pranab Mukherjee for turning a blind eye to such ministerial impropriety? The minister of sports, M S Gill, did not cover himself with glory when his actions resulted in public humiliation for a former wrestling champion and a senior government official. This is when Gill wanted to be photographed only with Sushil Kumar, after the young wrestler won the gold medal at a world championship. The champion wrestler’s coach, Satpal Singh, happened to be in the frame when Gill and Sushil Kumar were to be photographed. So, Singh was pushed out of the frame and the entire wrestling community was scandalised. The minister remained unmoved.
There are many more such instances. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had set up a group of ministers, headed by Urban Development Minister Jaipal Reddy, to oversee the smooth implementation of projects for the Commonwealth Games. Last week, Reddy decided almost unilaterally that his task was over and the group would cease to hold its meetings, even as problems over the execution of various projects for the Games continued to embarrass the government. Why did Reddy decide to announce the completion of his task when the nation and certainly the prime minister, to whom he reports, thought otherwise?
The problem is not just of incompetence or indifference to honouring conventions and ministerial protocol. Ministers under the UPA government have been allowed to give precedence to their personal or political priorities over those that arise out of their role and responsibility as central ministers. A central minister is also a member of a political group. In a coalition, the minister may not even belong to the majority group that leads the government. It is the prime minister’s job to make sure that ministers belonging to different political groups and his own party do not follow their own agenda while neglecting their ministerial responsibilities. It is this failure that has let these ministers go scot free even after flouting ministerial propriety.